JUDGMENT
Archana Wadhwa
1. Nobody is present on behalf of the appellant who has made a prayer for disposal of the case on merits. Accordingly, I have heard Shri D.K.Bhowmik, ld.JDR
2. It is seen from the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs that the appellant has been penalised to the extent of Rs.10,000/- under the provisions of Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 based upon these statements of one Shri Krishna Paul from whom 4 pcs. of gold biscuits of foreign origin were recovered. The said Shri Krishna Paul in his statement had deposed that the said biscuits were to be delivered to the appellant, Shri Bhasan Paul. However, in his statement given to the Customs Officers during the course of investigation, the appellant had denied any relation with the seized gold biscuits or with Shri Krishna Paul. I find that there is no other evidence on record to implicate the appellant except the statement of Shri Krishna Paul. The Commissioner in his impugned order has observed that the appellant may have wilfully denied the claim of ownership of the said seized gold bars to avoid the legal proceedings but he has failed to note that the conviction is not based on the assumption and presumption. But there needs to be evidence to show the involvement of the appellant in the present matter. There is no corroboration to the statement of Shri Krishna Paul. It is well settled that the testimony of co-accused, without any corroboration from independent sources, is a weak evidence and cannot be made the basis for penalising the accused. Accordingly, I set aside the personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on the appellant. The impugned order is modified to that extent. Stay Petition also gets disposed of.
Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.